They didn't affect the outcome of the game and I'm not trying to start a horrible officiating thread here, just some curiosities.

Swain Drop: Everyone seemed to agree this wasn't a catch, but what about it wasn't a catch? I used to think 2 feet and a football move = catch, and my take through my green 'n gold glasses saw him twist 180 degrees, get two feet down and move up field before the ball was jostled loose.

Collins' Celebration: This wasn't explained much, but it looked like flags were thrown just as he got to his knees in the back of the endzone. I don't even know what the letter of the law is, but I can assure you that my TD celebration at my apt. was 100 times more exuberant than his! He just pick 6'd and put the Packers up 14 in the Super Bowl, give him some leeway.

The commentators were all saying they thought the Swain drop was a catch, and the more I watched the replays, the more I was inclined to agree with them. I think it should have been ruled a fumble recovered by Jennings.

And can anyone explain to me why the NFL sees a substantive difference between kneeling on one knee versus kneeling on two knees in the end zone? Both can be expressions of prayer or exultation. It makes no sense.

The commentators were all saying they thought the Swain drop was a catch, and the more I watched the replays, the more I was inclined to agree with them. I think it should have been ruled a fumble recovered by Jennings.

Aikman, Periera (sp?) and Buck all felt it was a drop, as did ESPN after the game.

The commentators were all saying they thought the Swain drop was a catch, and the more I watched the replays, the more I was inclined to agree with them. I think it should have been ruled a fumble recovered by Jennings.

Don't know which broadcast you watched.. but they were in the camp it wasn't a catch. *edit.. your above response posted during my reply.

I am sorry.. this is one of the areas the NFL needs to scrub this season.. defining a catch and taking out this nonsense of a football move in its definition.

By the rules established today.. it is a judgment what a football move is.

IMO.. two feet down with established possession is a catch.

IMO.. Swain never effectively established possession cleanly.. and they ruled it correctly regardless of the silly and pathetic football move.

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

the facemask WAS a horrible call...but again, I'm in no way saying that affected the outcome. There were probably a few PIs the Packers could have been called for in the first half, so it all came out in the laundry, I'm bringing this up to question the RULES rather than the refs.

It's gotten to the point where catches are defined with microscopic precision, which ironically actually muddles things up. I think the rule should basically be: If it looks like a catch, it's a catch, goddammit. It's stupid that trivialities like the ball rotating in the receiver's hand or the nose hitting the ground even though the receiver's palms are clearly under the ball can invalidate what's obviously a catch. And the whole "process of catching the ball" nonsense needs to go. Return the game to its intuitive roots instead of its legalistic paralysis.

I was going to start an officiating thread, mostly to say that the officials did okay except for the bogus facemask call on Crabtree. But these two plays are worth discussing. I think the announcers let us down by not explaining them better.

With the Collins thing, I think somebody (maybe the official) said something about "going to the ground" as part of the celebration. I didn't know there was a rule against that. It didn't look excessive, but if there's a rule against it, they had to enforce it.

As for the Swain play, it had the look of a non-catch to me because he didn't tuck it in. I think the officials have been pretty consistent on those kinds of plays, so I wasn't mad about it, though on the other hand, it was worth challenging.

I did think that it was a pretty clean game from an officiating standpoint. Most of the penalties were false starts or obvious holds. There were no pass interference controversies, which is more a credit to the DBs than to the officials. And the personal fouls by Williams and the Steeler player were obvious.

As I said before, the Crabtree penalty looked like a blatant screw-up. It was sort of a flukey play and I can see how it may have looked like a facemask in real time, but I still say that you shouldn't call a penalty unless you actually see it--and you can't see something that didn't happen.

"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

On Collins.. he ran all the way across the endzone and was probably move for the delay (and the group) than the act itself.

Commonly players take knees.. but I think it was the circumstances in which Collins did it.

No Fun League is still in effect even on the big stage.

What the rules say aside, how can anyone say Collins' celebration was excessive and Mendenhall's was not? It's a display of elation, it's not offensive or over the top. That should never be a penalty in any game.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.